x86-based, barebone router - Firewalls

This is a discussion on x86-based, barebone router - Firewalls ; I need kind of a programmable router running on Linux or FreeBSD based on an x-86 arch-type box that should comsume the minimal amount of power (like a basic router) ... ~ Ideally I shouldn't even need a fan. Just ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: x86-based, barebone router

  1. x86-based, barebone router

    I need kind of a programmable router running on Linux or FreeBSD
    based on an x-86 arch-type box that should comsume the minimal amount
    of power (like a basic router) ...
    ~
    Ideally I shouldn't even need a fan. Just the most minimal hardware
    to run networking, a firewall, rated DHCP (some internal ports get
    more bandwidth than other), port redirection ...
    ~
    The thing is that most routers come programmed with their software or
    firmware and are hard to tinker with
    ~
    How do you think I could/should go for it?
    ~
    Do you know of people doing these kinds of things?
    ~
    lbrtchx


  2. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    In comp.security.firewalls lbrtchx@hotmail.com wrote:
    > I need kind of a programmable router running on Linux or FreeBSD
    > based on an x-86 arch-type box that should comsume the minimal amount
    > of power (like a basic router) ...
    > ~
    > Ideally I shouldn't even need a fan. Just the most minimal hardware
    > to run networking, a firewall, rated DHCP (some internal ports get
    > more bandwidth than other), port redirection ...
    > ~
    > The thing is that most routers come programmed with their software or
    > firmware and are hard to tinker with
    > ~
    > How do you think I could/should go for it?


    http://www.pcengines.ch/
    http://www.soekris.com/

    And don't cross-post without a followup-to. Fixed.

    cu
    59cobalt
    --
    "If a software developer ever believes a rootkit is a necessary part of
    their architecture they should go back and re-architect their solution."
    --Mark Russinovich

  3. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    lbrtchx@hotmail.com wrote:
    > I need kind of a programmable router running on Linux or FreeBSD
    > based on an x-86 arch-type box that should comsume the minimal amount
    > of power (like a basic router) ...


    Well, you could get a router running on GPL code like some routers from
    Linksys, Netgear, Buffalo, and others.

    I have a Linksys WRT54G flashed with a 3rd party firmware
    HyperWRT+Thibor. The web configuration is extended but most important
    you have shell access on the box. For instance, I can configure the
    packet filter directly with iptables. If you need something special you
    can also compile your own binaries and install them.

    A good starting point for reading is the web site of DD-WRT, another 3rd
    party firmware project for the WRT54G and more routers (other brands,
    too). http://www.dd-wrt.com/ In particular look at the Wiki where you
    can read which routers and brands can be flashed with DD-WRT (and other
    3rd party firmware).

    For the WRT54G you should also read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WRT54G
    If you buy the WRT be sure not to buy one of the versions with less
    memory like the WRT54Gv5,v6,v7.

    Gerald

  4. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.networking.]

    On 2007-03-26, Gerald Vogt wrote:
    >
    > For the WRT54G you should also read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WRT54G
    > If you buy the WRT be sure not to buy one of the versions with less
    > memory like the WRT54Gv5,v6,v7.


    It's not always easy to find older hardware. The WRT54GL is a current
    model that supports DD-WRT as well as OpenWRT. It's not x86, but it is
    very simple hardware that supports linux readily.

    --keith

    --
    kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
    (try just my userid to email me)
    AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
    see X- headers for PGP signature information


  5. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    You may wish to investigate David Davis CCIE: How do Vyatta's open
    source routers stack up to Cisco?

    http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/11977

    and Vyatta - Welcome to Open-Source Networking:

    http://www.vyatta.com/

    Sincerely,

    Brad Reese on Cisco
    Network World Magazine Cisco Subnet
    http://www.networkworld.com/subnets/cisco/


  6. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    > I need kind of a programmable router running on Linux or FreeBSD
    > based on an x-86 arch-type box that should comsume the minimal amount
    > of power (like a basic router) ...


    For quite some time, my home router was an old DEC machine - a dual
    Pentium 133 with 96 megs, and no hard drive. It ran Coyote Linux which I
    modified to use an SMP kernel just for kicks. While saturating a 6-megabit
    line with multiple bittorrents, I measured the electrical draw from the wall
    at 45 watts.

    I have a couple of Via C3-based machines now which don't do any better,
    and one draws MORE power from the wall. Between having a hard drive,
    CD-ROM, and seemingly much lower-efficiency power supplies, the actual power
    draw is often 65 watts. A P3-650 with three hard drives in use as a file
    server only drew barely more than that.

    As another comparison, I have some Athlon64 3800+ machines which, when
    under easy usage (say, surfing), only draw about 60 watts from the wall. In
    fact, in planning for UPS capacity, I found that those machines WITH a 19"
    LCD would only draw more than 100 watts together a few times during the
    "usage cycle" - startup, network login, normal usage, shutdown.

    In any event, ANY of those machines will have much more than enough power
    for routing - the dual Pentium 133 very rarely exceeded a load of .02, and
    CPU time spent in system usage was rarely more than 1% or 2%.

    As others have said, to get power levels much lower than those, you'll
    have to go to non-x86 hardware. One of the routers on which you can put
    Linux (and hence, customize to a great extent) will probably use 1/4 of that
    power.



  7. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 01:15:32 +0000, Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers wrote:

    > In comp.security.firewalls lbrtchx@hotmail.com wrote:
    >> I need kind of a programmable router running on Linux or FreeBSD
    >> based on an x-86 arch-type box that should comsume the minimal amount
    >> of power (like a basic router) ...
    >> ~
    >> Ideally I shouldn't even need a fan. Just the most minimal hardware
    >> to run networking, a firewall, rated DHCP (some internal ports get
    >> more bandwidth than other), port redirection ...
    >> ~
    >> The thing is that most routers come programmed with their software or
    >> firmware and are hard to tinker with
    >> ~
    >> How do you think I could/should go for it?

    >
    > http://www.pcengines.ch/
    > http://www.soekris.com/
    >
    > And don't cross-post without a followup-to. Fixed.
    >
    > cu
    > 59cobalt


    I'm very happy with Soekris. Using OpenBSD.
    Heard good things about Monowall (Router/FW software FreeBSD based)

  8. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    Steve Wolfe wrote:
    >
    > As others have said, to get power levels much lower than those, you'll
    > have to go to non-x86 hardware. One of the routers on which you can put
    > Linux (and hence, customize to a great extent) will probably use 1/4 of that
    > power.
    >


    I put a meter on my WRTSL54G (or whatever alphabet soup Linksys came up
    with) and it metered at a whopping 70 ma booting and about 140 ma when
    the radio came on.

    I could be wrong on those numbers by a few ma, but work out the math:

    140 ma @ 5v = .7W

    Whee! a 200 MHz MIPS chip is a nice thing.

    --Yan

  9. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    CptDondo writes:

    > Steve Wolfe wrote:
    >> As others have said, to get power levels much lower than those,
    >> you'll have to go to non-x86 hardware. One of the routers on which
    >> you can put Linux (and hence, customize to a great extent) will
    >> probably use 1/4 of that power.

    >
    > I put a meter on my WRTSL54G (or whatever alphabet soup Linksys came
    > up with) and it metered at a whopping 70 ma booting and about 140 ma
    > when the radio came on.
    >
    > I could be wrong on those numbers by a few ma, but work out the math:
    >
    > 140 ma @ 5v = .7W
    >
    > Whee! a 200 MHz MIPS chip is a nice thing.


    Most (all?) of the Linksys routers have ARM chips. Still nice, of
    course.

    --
    Måns Rullgård
    mans@mansr.com

  10. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    Måns Rullgård wrote:
    > CptDondo writes:
    >
    >> Whee! a 200 MHz MIPS chip is a nice thing.

    >
    > Most (all?) of the Linksys routers have ARM chips. Still nice, of
    > course.
    >


    Are you sure about that? OpenWrt only has experimental arm support but
    very stable MIPS support. Most of the chips are MIPS.

    http://wiki.openwrt.org/TableOfHardware

    --Yan

  11. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    CptDondo writes:

    > Måns Rullgård wrote:
    >> CptDondo writes:
    >>
    >>> Whee! a 200 MHz MIPS chip is a nice thing.

    >> Most (all?) of the Linksys routers have ARM chips. Still nice, of
    >> course.
    >>

    >
    > Are you sure about that? OpenWrt only has experimental arm support
    > but very stable MIPS support. Most of the chips are MIPS.
    >
    > http://wiki.openwrt.org/TableOfHardware


    You're quite right. I was looking at that list some time ago, and
    most of the models on sale here (UK) seemed to be the ARM varieties.

    --
    Måns Rullgård
    mans@mansr.com

  12. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    lbrtchx@hotmail.com wrote:

    > I need kind of a programmable router running on Linux or FreeBSD
    > based on an x-86 arch-type box that should comsume the minimal amount
    > of power (like a basic router) ...
    > ~
    > Ideally I shouldn't even need a fan. Just the most minimal hardware
    > to run networking, a firewall, rated DHCP (some internal ports get
    > more bandwidth than other), port redirection ...
    > ~
    > The thing is that most routers come programmed with their software or
    > firmware and are hard to tinker with
    > ~
    > How do you think I could/should go for it?
    > ~
    > Do you know of people doing these kinds of things?
    > ~
    > lbrtchx


    http://www.mini-box.com/s.nl/sc.8/category.19/.f

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  13. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    >> As others have said, to get power levels much lower than those, you'll
    >> have to go to non-x86 hardware. One of the routers on which you can put
    >> Linux (and hence, customize to a great extent) will probably use 1/4 of
    >> that power.

    >
    > I put a meter on my WRTSL54G (or whatever alphabet soup Linksys came up
    > with) and it metered at a whopping 70 ma booting and about 140 ma when the
    > radio came on.
    >
    > I could be wrong on those numbers by a few ma, but work out the math:
    >
    > 140 ma @ 5v = .7W
    >
    > Whee! a 200 MHz MIPS chip is a nice thing.


    Take something that can measure AC power, and see what it actually draws
    from the wall. I'm sure you lose more in conversion, rectifying, and
    filtering than you actually use for the router! :-)

    steve



  14. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    Steve Wolfe wrote:
    >> I put a meter on my WRTSL54G (or whatever alphabet soup Linksys came up
    >> with) and it metered at a whopping 70 ma booting and about 140 ma when the
    >> radio came on.
    >>
    >> I could be wrong on those numbers by a few ma, but work out the math:
    >>
    >> 140 ma @ 5v = .7W
    >>
    >> Whee! a 200 MHz MIPS chip is a nice thing.

    >
    > Take something that can measure AC power, and see what it actually draws
    > from the wall. I'm sure you lose more in conversion, rectifying, and
    > filtering than you actually use for the router! :-)


    No doubt, but this one is running off batteries. :-)

    That's why I had to measure it - to make sure it didn't kill the
    batteries too quick.

    --Yan

  15. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 11:55:01 -0800, CptDondo rearranged some electrons to
    form:

    > Steve Wolfe wrote:
    >>
    >> As others have said, to get power levels much lower than those, you'll
    >> have to go to non-x86 hardware. One of the routers on which you can put
    >> Linux (and hence, customize to a great extent) will probably use 1/4 of that
    >> power.
    >>

    >
    > I put a meter on my WRTSL54G (or whatever alphabet soup Linksys came up
    > with) and it metered at a whopping 70 ma booting and about 140 ma when
    > the radio came on.
    >
    > I could be wrong on those numbers by a few ma, but work out the math:
    >
    > 140 ma @ 5v = .7W
    >
    > Whee! a 200 MHz MIPS chip is a nice thing.
    >
    > --Yan


    The DC input voltage for a WRT54G is 12V, not 5V.

    140ma @ 12V = 1.7W

    The power brick probably dissipates more than that in heat.



    --
    David M (dmacchiarolo)
    http://home.triad.rr.com/redsled
    T/S 53
    sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 22 days 11:29


  16. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    David M wrote:
    > On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 11:55:01 -0800, CptDondo rearranged some electrons to
    > form:
    >
    >> Steve Wolfe wrote:
    >>> As others have said, to get power levels much lower than those, you'll
    >>> have to go to non-x86 hardware. One of the routers on which you can put
    >>> Linux (and hence, customize to a great extent) will probably use 1/4 of that
    >>> power.
    >>>

    >> I put a meter on my WRTSL54G (or whatever alphabet soup Linksys came up
    >> with) and it metered at a whopping 70 ma booting and about 140 ma when
    >> the radio came on.
    >>
    >> I could be wrong on those numbers by a few ma, but work out the math:
    >>
    >> 140 ma @ 5v = .7W
    >>
    >> Whee! a 200 MHz MIPS chip is a nice thing.
    >>
    >> --Yan

    >
    > The DC input voltage for a WRT54G is 12V, not 5V.
    >
    > 140ma @ 12V = 1.7W
    >
    > The power brick probably dissipates more than that in heat.
    >
    >
    >


    You could be right.... I'm going from memory. It's a wrtsl54gs; the one
    with the USB port. The setup has both 12V and 5V components on it.

    It's still just a little bit of power, though, compared to a full-size
    computer.

  17. Re: x86-based, barebone router


    > You could be right.... I'm going from memory. It's a wrtsl54gs; the one
    > with the USB port. The setup has both 12V and 5V components on it.
    >
    > It's still just a little bit of power, though, compared to a full-size
    > computer.


    That is pretty nice. Even if it's 1.7 watts, it wouldn't take much of a
    battery to keep that running for quite some time. The units from mini-box
    that someone pointed out look pretty sweet, too... I'll have to see if I can
    think up a use for one of those.

    steve



  18. Re: x86-based, barebone router

    Steve Wolfe wrote:
    >> You could be right.... I'm going from memory. It's a wrtsl54gs; the one
    >> with the USB port. The setup has both 12V and 5V components on it.
    >>
    >> It's still just a little bit of power, though, compared to a full-size
    >> computer.

    >
    > That is pretty nice. Even if it's 1.7 watts, it wouldn't take much of a
    > battery to keep that running for quite some time. The units from mini-box
    > that someone pointed out look pretty sweet, too... I'll have to see if I can
    > think up a use for one of those.
    >
    > steve
    >
    >


    Well, if you're really looking to power something off a battery for a
    long, long time check out the TS-7260 from embeddedarm.com . You can
    selectively slow the CPU, turn off various things, and do all sorts of
    power conserving tweaks. I think they got it down to something like 40
    ma at 5V with everything turned off and the CPU slowed to
    next-to-nothing....



+ Reply to Thread